Motion-blurred skater in a Montreal Canadiens sweater
Breakdown · TOR at MTL

Canadiens run the Maple Leafs off the ice on the underlying numbers

The verdict · earned

The Canadiens earned it — the game and the expected-goals battle both.

TOR 1 · MTL 3
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 6:32 AMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarityDrafted from NHL play-by-play by Backcheck's model, worded for clarity by an AI editor that may not change a number. Nobody at Backcheck was at the rink. How this works

Montreal's 3-1 win understates how thoroughly they controlled the game — they held 71% of 5v5 expected goals despite a scoreline that looks more competitive than it was.

The Canadiens dominated shot attempts (65%, 33–18 on goal) and high-danger chances (11–4), generating three times as many truly dangerous looks. They shot more efficiently too: 0.092 expected goals per shot versus Toronto's 0.053.

What kept the gap from being wider: Montreal underperformed their expected goals by 3.26, while J. Woll remained between the pipes and stopped 4.3 goals above expected. The Maple Leafs' netminder posted a 0.938 SV% despite Toronto creating only 2.52 expected goals total.

J. Dobes stopped 17 of 18 for Montreal (0.944 SV%), but Woll was the standout: he saved 4.3 goals above expected and kept 91% of high-danger chances off the board despite facing 11 of them.

Montreal's efficiency on the rush proved decisive — three goals on 30 rush chances. The Canadiens crashed the net hard enough to generate four rebound opportunities, though they converted none; Toronto created four as well but left them unused.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Mar 10
TOR
1
MTL
3

Canadiens run the Maple Leafs off the ice on the underlying numbers

Chances 2.5 – 6.3Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Canadiens earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
TOR
2.52
MTL
6.26
29% of the chances71%

The board read TOR 1, MTL 3. The chances read TOR 2.5, MTL 6.3.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
MTL
−3.3
goals above expected
MTL6.26 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored
TOR2.52 expected · 1 scored
Expected
Scored

The Maple Leafs left 1.5 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 04:46MTLO. Kapanen0–1
  2. P1 14:41MTLP. Danault0–2
  3. P2 14:33TORW. Nylander1–2
  4. P3 19:32MTLJ. EvansEN1–3
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
TOR
29 shots
1
Final
81 shots
MTL
52 shots
3
TOR attackMTL attack
TOR MTL Goal
29
shots · 1 in
52
shots · 3 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
TORMTL
1 / 4
1.11 xG
High danger
1 / 11
3.46 xG
0 / 9
0.96 xG
Medium
2 / 21
2.31 xG
0 / 35
0.45 xG
Low
0 / 36
0.49 xG

High-danger looks: TOR 1 of 4, MTL 1 of 11.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
J. Woll
+4.3
TOR · 30/32
A
J. Dobes
+1.5
MTL · 17/18
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Canadiens run the Maple Leafs off the ice on the underlying numbers

A model, not a newsroom. Every number on these frames comes from the NHL's play-by-play and our own models. Nothing was watched, guessed or heard from anyone.

Read the full breakdown
backcheckreport.com
01 / 08 · Final
Every goal, in order

How it happened

NHL play-by-play
1stshots 5–18
  1. 04:46MTLO. Kapanen(A. Newhook, I. Demidov)0–1
  2. 14:41MTLP. Danault(K. Guhle, L. Hutson)0–2
2ndshots 11–6
  1. 14:33TORW. Nylander(E. Cowan)1–2
3rdshots 2–9
  1. 19:32MTLJ. Evansempty net(M. Matheson)1–3

score reads TOR–MTL

Source · NHL play-by-play (api-web.nhle.com)
Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
6.26
MTL chances
Goals their shots were worth
−3.3
Finishing
Goals below what those chances were worth
1.023
MTL puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
58.6%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

2.52Expected goals6.26
MTL 71% of the chance quality
18Shots on goal33
4High-danger chances11
48All attempts (Corsi)68
Adjusted for score: TOR 46% · MTL 54%
Faceoffs · MTL won80%off46%neu30%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
TOR1 / 4 · 1.11 xG
MTL1 / 11 · 3.46 xG
Medium dangermid-range
TOR0 / 9 · 0.96 xG
MTL2 / 21 · 2.31 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
TOR0 / 35 · 0.45 xG
MTL0 / 36 · 0.49 xG

MTL went 1-for-11 from high danger on 3.46 expected goals — 2.5 left on the table.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL play-by-play
The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
TOR
1 G · 2.52 xG · -1.5
MTL
3 G · 6.26 xG · -3.3
01234567

TOR finished -1.5 against expected, MTL -3.3.

Source · Backcheck xG model
Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +
What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots
TOR
SNAP1/24
SLAP0/3
BACKHAND0/1
TIP IN0/1
WRIST0/0
WRAP AROUND0/0
OTHER0/19
MTL
SNAP2/35
SLAP0/5
BACKHAND0/5
TIP IN0/3
WRIST1/3
WRAP AROUND0/1
OTHER0/16
TOR
MTL
Off the rush
1 G on 18
1.41 xG
3 G on 30
4.01 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 4
0.73 xG
0 G on 4
0.65 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: TOR went 1-for-24, MTL 2-for-35. MTL scored 3 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
New to these numbers?

Two things happened in this game: who created the better chances, and who put the puck in the net. They are not the same thing, and this page separates them on purpose.

The one to watch is expected goals— the best single read on who deserved to win. When it disagrees with the scoreboard, that disagreement is usually the story. Nothing here is a projection; every figure is computed from this game's play-by-play. Full glossary →

xG
Expected goals. Every shot scored by how often that exact look goes in. 2.5 xG means the chances were worth about two and a half goals.
HD
High-danger chances — shots from the slot and the crease, where shots actually become goals.
Corsi
Every shot attempt, including the ones that missed or got blocked. A rough read on who had the puck.
Adj.
Score-adjusted. Teams that trail shoot more and teams that lead sit back, so this corrects the attempt count for the scoreboard.
GSAx
Goals saved above expected. A positive number means the goalie stopped more than an average goalie would have on those shots.
PDO
Shooting % plus save % — a luck gauge. It sits near 1.000 over a season, so a game far from it usually means the bounces decided it.
Shot by shot

In the net

Graded on goals saved above expected
J. Woll
TOR · 30/32 · .938
+4.3
saved above expected
A+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/113.5+2.5
Medium2/212.3+0.3
Low0/360.5+0.5

A+ ≥ +2.5 saved above expected · A ≥ +1.5 · B+ ≥ +0.75 · B ≥ +0.25 · C ≥ −0.25 · D ≥ −0.75 · F below −1.5

J. Dobes
MTL · 17/18 · .944
+1.5
saved above expected
A
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/41.1+0.1
Medium0/91.0+1.0
Low0/350.5+0.5

A+ ≥ +2.5 saved above expected · A ≥ +1.5 · B+ ≥ +0.75 · B ≥ +0.25 · C ≥ −0.25 · D ≥ −0.75 · F below −1.5

81 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
TOR
29 shots
1
Final
81 shots
MTL
52 shots
3
TOR attackMTL attack
TOR MTL Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — TOR left, MTL right — the way you would watch it. A dot's size is how dangerous the look was, from distance and angle; it is a proxy for shot quality, not the xG model the article is written from. Hover a dot for the shooter and the clock.

Ranked from the box score

Three stars

Points first
Three stars · computed, not voted
M. Matheson
#8 · D · MTL
0 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 23:49 on ice
K. Guhle
#21 · D · MTL
0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 22:26 on ice · +2
L. Hutson
#48 · D · MTL
0 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 21:33 on ice · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Tue, Mar 10
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 6:31 AMEdited for clarityDrafted from NHL play-by-play by Backcheck's model, worded for clarity by an AI editor that may not change a number. Nobody at Backcheck was at the rink. How this works

This is a pick'em. The model projects a 2.4–2.7 Toronto goal outcome with Montreal at 54% win probability—close enough that flipping a coin would be equally honest.

Montreal is the hotter team, posting a 6-1-3 run over their last 10. Toronto is underwater at -12 goal differential in the same span. If recent form settles the question, the Canadiens win.

But the advanced numbers complicate it. Montreal's 49.0% Corsi and 48.0% expected goal share should translate to territorial advantage, yet Toronto stays competitive at 45.0% Corsi and 46.0% xG%. The efficiency gap is tighter than the shot suppression suggests.

Montreal's real vulnerability is their 1.018 PDO—they're running hot, and regression is statistical law. Toronto sits at 1.002, closer to sustainable reality. Expect some Montreal regression unless they sustain their scoring touch despite tighter luck.

The scoring edge is Montreal's to lose. Cole Caufield is operating at 0.97 xG/60 with 33 goals and a 20.0% shooting rate, meaning he's both generating chances and executing them at an elite level. Oliver Kapanen at 0.83 xG/60 with 19 goals adds a secondary threat that Toronto cannot afford to ignore.

Toronto counters with Auston Matthews at 1.10 xG/60—the highest volume creator on the ice—paired with 17 goals and a 10.6% shooting clip that leaves room to run hotter. John Tavares supplies consistency: 0.91 xG/60, 15 goals, 12.4% shooting, and 24 assists suggesting he facilitates as much as he finishes. If Toronto's power play clicks, Matthews and Tavares create a ceiling that matches Montreal's scoring.

The defensive concern for Toronto centers on Bo Groulx; for Montreal, Mike Matheson sits as a potential weak link. Neither team generates a notable high-danger-goal advantage on either end, making this a five-on-five game where territorial advantage meets skill variance.

Montreal's recent hot streak and territorial edge make them the slight favorite. But Toronto's elite scoring talent and closer-to-sustainable luck profile means this feels genuinely uncertain. The Canadiens should win the territorial battle; the Maple Leafs have the tools to steal one if their stars perform.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

MTL 54%
54%
MTL
Model favorite
46%
54%
TOR50MTL

MTL by 8 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score TOR 2.4–2.7 MTL; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates
Season rates · 5v5

Tale of the tape

NHL stats API · our xG
TOR← edge
edge →MTL
46.0%48.0%
45.0%49.0%
2.242.41
2.672.62
2.092.24
2.521.96
1.0021.018

MTL holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.002 vs 1.018) says MTL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
TOR
3-5-2
-12 GD · 2d rest
MTL
6-1-3
+11 GD · 2d rest
1.002
TOR PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
1.018
MTL PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live
  • The Canadiens drive Corsi at 49.0% — expect territorial tilt.
Regression watch
  • The Canadiens' PDO is 1.018 — running hot, expect some regression.
Things to watch
  • The Canadiens drive Corsi at 49.0% — expect territorial tilt.
  • The Canadiens are the hotter team by points pace (6-1-3 in their last 10).
  • The Maple Leafs are underwater at -12 goal differential over their last 10.
  • The Canadiens' PDO is 1.018 — running hot, expect some regression.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
TOR
Expected in goal
A. Stolarz
2 days rest.875 last start
Backup Joseph Woll · -6.6 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

MTL
Expected in goal
J. Dobes
2 days rest.923 last start
Backup Jakub Dobes · +17.3 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

Lineups are the players who dressed in each club's last game, with their minutes; clubs confirm tonight's at warm-up. Every player this preview names was in that lineup.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

NHL stats API · our xG
TOR
Auston Matthews17G 13A
1.10 xG/60 · 1 HD · 10.6% sh
John Tavares15G 24A
0.91 xG/60 · 3 HD · 12.4% sh
MTL
Cole Caufield33G 16A
0.97 xG/60 · 1 HD · 20.0% sh
Oliver Kapanen19G 12A
0.83 xG/60 · 4 HD · 17.8% sh
Keep going

Where to next